| 向雪静,罗媛媛,李镰,邓宇,马晓洁.基于深度学习与图谱库自动勾画前列腺癌危及器官的对比研究[J].中华放射医学与防护杂志,2023,43(6):435-439 |
| 基于深度学习与图谱库自动勾画前列腺癌危及器官的对比研究 |
| A comparative study of automatic delineation of organs at risk for prostate cancer based on deep learning and atlas library |
| 投稿时间：2023-01-07 |
| DOI：10.3760/cma.j.cn112271-20230107-00006 |
| 中文关键词: 前列腺肿瘤 深度学习 自动勾画 危及器官 X射线计算机体层摄影 |
| 英文关键词:Prostatic neoplasms Deep learning Automatic sketch Organs at risk X-ray computed tomography |
| 基金项目:四川省抗癌协会肿瘤临床科研项目（XH2022-510） |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 965 |
| 全文下载次数: 334 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 目的 比较基于深度学习的uPWS R15软件与基于图谱库的MIM-Maestro 6.9软件自动勾画前列腺癌危及器官的勾画效果，为临床应用提供参考依据。方法 回顾性选取川北医学院附属医院肿瘤放疗科2018年至2022年收治的90例前列腺癌患者的CT资料。基于上海联影医疗科技股份有限公司开发的uPWS R15软件与北京明维视景医疗软件有限公司开发的MIM-Maestro 6.9软件对危及器官进行自动勾画，根据勾画时间（T）、戴斯相似系数（DSC）、雅卡尔相似系数（JSC）、豪斯多夫距离（HD）及平均最小距离（MDA）5项参数指标，评价uPWS软件与MIM软件自动勾画危及器官的效果。结果 uPWS软件的勾画时间小于MIM软件的勾画时间，两种软件勾画双侧股骨头、皮肤的效果差异无统计学意义（P>0.05），勾画右侧肾脏（tMDA=-3.43，zDSC=-4.03，zJSC=-4.16，P<0.05）、左侧肾脏（tMDA=-3.87，zDSC=-4.18，zJSC=-4.41，P<0.05）、小肠（tMDA=-8.57，zDSC=-9.99，tJSC=14.21，P<0.05）和直肠（zMDA=-4.00，tDSC=-9.98，tJSC=9.72，P<0.05）的差异均有统计学意义。勾画膀胱（z=-7.88、-9.00、-8.17、-8.74，P<0.05）及脊髓（z=-3.87、-4.43、4.03、3.05，P<0.05） HD、MDA、DSC、JSC的效果差异有统计学意义。uPWS软件自动勾画的DSC>0.7，而MIM软件自动勾画的DSC除了小肠和直肠外的其他危及器官均>0.7，且uPWS软件自动勾画危及器官（双侧股骨头、双侧肾脏、脊髓、膀胱、皮肤、直肠和小肠）的HD、MDA、JSC值均普遍优于MIM软件的勾画效果。结论 uPWS软件的勾画效果优于MIM软件，但MIM软件经过修改小肠和直肠后也能满足临床使用，为放射治疗前的准备节省了大量的时间。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| Objective To compare the effect of uPWS R15 software based on deep learning with MIM-Maestro 6.9 software based on atlas library to automatically delineate the organs at risk of prostate cancer in order to provide a reference for clinical application.Methods The CT data of 90 prostate cancer patients admitted to the Department of Oncology Radiotherapy of the Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College from 2018 to 2022 were retrospectively selected. Based on the uPWS R15 software developed by Shanghai United Imaging Medical Technology Company and the MIM-Maestro 6.9 software developed by Beijing Mingwei Vision Medical Software Company, the effects of uPWS and MIM software on automatic delineation of organs at risk were evaluated according to five parameters, including delineation time (T), Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), Jaccard similarity coefficient (JSC), Hausdorff distance (HD) and the mean distance to agreement (MDA).Results The sketching time of uPWS software was less than that of MIM software. There were no significant differences in the sketching effect of femoral head and skin between the two software (all P>0.05). The delineation of right kidney (tMDA=-3.43, zDSC=-4.03, zJSC=-4.16, P<0.05), left kidney (tMDA=-3.87, zDSC=-4.18, zJSC=-4.41, P<0.05), small intestine (tMDA=-8.57, zDSC=-9.99, tJSC=14.21, P<0.05) and rectum (zMDA=-4.00, tDSC=-9.98, tJSC=9.72, P< 0.05) except HD, was statistically different. The bladder (z=-7.88, -9.00, -8.17, -8.74, P<0.05) and spinalcord (z=-3.87, -4.43, 4.03, 3.05, P<0.05) were also delineated with significant differences. The DSC automatically delineated by uPWS software was >0.7, while the DSC automatically delineated by MIM software was >0.7 for all other organs at risk except small intestine and rectum. In addition, the HD, MDA and JSC values of the organs at risk (bilateral femoral head, bilateral kidneys, spinal cord, bladder, skin, rectum and small intestine) automatically delineated by uPWS software were generally better than those with MIM software.Conclusions The uPWS software outlines better than the MIM software, but the MIM software can also be used clinically with modifications to the small bowel and rectum, saving a great deal of time in preparation for radiation therapy. |
| HTML 查看全文 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
|
|
|